Assistant Village Idiot

I was listening to some ESPN thing on the radio on my way home tonight and heard a show host ask Jemele Hill a moderately difficult opinion question. She hemmed and hawed, and eventually said "Let me be completely honest here" and I winced, because even though she's a bit vacuous and cliched, she seems to mean well and I like her. Yet here she is saying not only the magic phrase "be honest," but has doubled down to "be completely honest." So the next thing that comes out of her mouth is going to be a lie, and I am sad.

She gets some credit, even after all that. She hemmed and hawed some more, evading the question and putting in all sorts of qualifiers before she actually answers. She went on for two whole minutes doing this, enough so that I concluded at some level she knows she's about to lie, but she's basically an honest young woman who doesn't want to, so she can't get there. Fascinating stuff. There was some back-reference to President Obama answering questions for 90 minutes today and then another 30 minutes more personally, and I could tell from her voice she thought he had answered gently, nobly, wisely, evenhandedly - she loves the man. Well I am resigned to that, but I'm betting that I would have heard something different in his answers, and could quote chapter and verse at the end of it that the usual suspects were being blamed, just under the cover of fair words.

Yet she couldn't come to answer, until finally she did, and it had red flags all through it. She was lying, but part her didn't want to and tried to keep her from it. It gave me a new perspective on my own theory, because I am quite sure she was not conscious of lying. If you had her on a witness stand you might be able to get her to see it - in fact I'm confident she could see it because she came so close with one statement.

Odd that telling a lie makes me like her better, because I could hear so clearly that she is an honest person who doesn't want to, but has this enormous conflict between her dual experiences. It's a very CS Lewis sort of moment to see where this goes over the years. People do different things ant points of decision, and tiny differences can become large ones.

This article on meritocracy showed up over at Maggie's. I expected to have so much to disagree with that I would certainly not share it. But Helen Andrews at the Hedgehog Review - I will have to read more over there on the basis of the name alone - anticipated and answered many of my objections and answered them.

I still have some, but I thought folks should read the article first. I skipped a lot of the history, and the alarming proposed solution may take a while for me to absorb. However, I don't have much more than cliches to answer it with, so for now I will just pipe down.

[フレーム]

Introduction to the Topic:

First Century Palestine was a bubbling stew of competing beliefs.Even if Jesus had not come during that time, religious historians would now look back at that period and say Wow. There’s a whole lot off stuff going on and many arguments coming to a head in that time and place. To Christians, this is not surprising when we think of it.This is the pivot point of both spiritual and worldly history, so we would just expect that everything is happening at once:people shouting, insisting, doubling down on their peculiar doctrines, longstanding controversies over centuries finally coming toeither-or points, authorities furious at each other, the common people confused but hoping to figure it out.

Modern Jews and secular historians would see the emergence of widespread Christianity as an accidental result of this.The Jews were one of many peoples in the Roman Empire. Their refusal to submit to Roman religious authority made them an unfortunate focal point, and the unimportant Christian sect of Jews which admitted non-Jews and was even more resistant to the Emperors, was both helped by the vast reach of empire and especially persecuted by it. Eh. These accidents of history happen all the time.They don’t prove anything philosophically. This is true.They don’t prove anything.But to those of us who already believe that this was the crux of human existence, there is a lot to learn here.As Yogi Berra said “You can see a lot just by looking.”

My personal image is of a network of bridges across a chasm, a maze of them.There is only one way through to the other side.There are a hundred ways to fall off into the abyss, but there are also many side paths that are not deadly but just wrong, requiring a sigh as we turn around and say “Well, that was promising, but it came to a dead end. Let’s head back and try again.” All of the major streams of thought in that time turned out to be inadequate, but they weren’t necessarily wrong or evil.Even the Pharisees, who Jesus levels for their behavior, were mostly criticized for their hypocrisy and obsessiveness, not their false doctrine.They shared many beliefs with Jesus, but had strayed from even their own best understanding of a few centuries before, let alone the new revelation of Christ.A gentle Pharisee such as Nicodemus, is corrected sternly but not condemned, and eventually turns out okay (we think).

The Essenes may have become overemphasized with regard to their actual influence at the time, because they are one of the four groups mentioned by Josephus and because it was in their caves that the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered.They may not have been numerous.

They withdrew from the mainstream of society, some of them removing to communities in the desert. They were pacifist, ceremonial, hierarchical, celibate, and mystical.They had frequent immersive baths; they shared all things in common and were generous to the poor; they stressed obedience of younger believers to elder. Entry into full membership took a few years.They kept up emphasis on the writings of the prophets, which everyone else was downplaying. However, they also were influenced by Greek and Babylonian mysticism, and tended to frame everything in terms of a coming conflict between the Children of Light and the Children of Darkness. You will sometimes see it suggested that John the Baptist was influenced by the Essenes.This is possible, but seems to mostly come from his being ascetic, living in the desert, and preaching baptism.

The Sadducees were the bulk of the Temple priests and authorities such as Sanhedrin – though not exclusively. They believed in the sole authority of Torah, not any commentary or received oral tradition. They were societal elites, much more willing to work with the Roman authorities and were influenced by their culture. As the prophets stressed obedience of the heart and downplayed or even condemned the sacrifices, you can see why the Sadducees regarded the prophets as unimportant. They did not believe in the resurrection of the body after death, as that is mostly a later idea in the OT.

The Pharisees believed not only in Torah, but in an Oral Tradition that had come down from Moses as well.They did not disbelieve in the prophets, but deemphasised them, as their own focus was on rules of ritual purity, especially with regards to the Sabbath.They were willing to be martyred rather than fight on the Sabbath two centuries earlier, and still had a high reputation because of this as people who were willing to be serious.They preached publicly and weren’t shy about telling others they were wrong. Jesus strongly objected to their additions to the rules, but did not disagree with other core beliefs of theirs. He was also furious at their personal hypocrisies.

The Zealots had a primary focus on Jews being able to rule themselves. Many were religious as well, and might be influenced by any of the above groups, or other scribes or rabbis who might be wandering and teaching. They did not have a core set of religious teachings. As persecution became greater more people joined or at least sympathized with their side, and by the time of the battles leading to the destruction off the Temple, 66-70AD, they were the dominant force among the Jews.

The Zealots were in the front of the battles and were destroyed. Without the Temple, the Sadducees had little meaning, the Essenes seem to have slowly disappeared about this time.This left the Pharisees as the dominant group in Judaism going forward.

Though I mean to spark serious reflection and understanding from it, the quiz is a bit of a game. First Century Palestine does not map exactly onto current American thinking, but I needed to preserve the divide-into-four structure for simplicity. An actual Essene or Zealot given this quiz might not answer in quite the way I have portrayed them here. My aim is to get you to see them with new understanding by seeing something of our times in theirs, and to see you own beliefs (and those of the Christians around you) in a different context.

The Quiz - new version

1. When religious authorities disagree, it is best to

A) Keep the pursuit of truth foremost, even if others are offended

B) Seek to get your people in as the authorities

C) Stay out of it and double down on the personal piety of your family and group

D) Stress everyone's unity against the rest of society

2. The source of authority for doctrine and practice is

A) The judgement of elders learned in the Scriptures and filled with the spirit

B) The Scriptures only

C) The Scriptures and the wisdom handed down

D) We can argue about that after we have freedom to worship

3. The battle in this world is between

A) God's Law and man's law

B) The Righteous and the Unrighteous

C) Obedience and Temptation

D) Light and Darkness

4. The center of Christian practice is

A) Commitment

B) Worship and Communion

C) Obedience

D) Community

5. Communion

A) Should be open to Christians of any description

B) Should be administered to the faithful only after lengthy prayer and reflection

C) Should only be administered by proper authorities

D) is less important than daily obedience

6. Doctrines not explicitly spelled out in Scripture should

A) be avoided as a distraction

B) be explored in personal and community devotions to see if they bring any illumination

C) not be rejected if they are held by some who are learned in the Scriptures

D) Ignored

7. Who has much to teach us?

A) The teachings passed down in discipleship from our own holy people

B) The mystical experiences of people in other religions

C) The practical wisdom of those who have succeeded in society

D) the people who have succeeded against our enemies

8. Potential conquerors have attacked us on the Sabbath. what should we do?

A) Fight them any day of the week

B) let's consider if they would be better than other potential conquerors

C) Don't fight them at all. God's kingdom is not of this world

D) Refuse to fight on the Sabbath, even if we are martyred

9. When the government discourages or impedes Christian practice but does not prevent it or forbid it, it is best to

A) Gain power in the government to create a more hospitable atmosphere

B) Withdraw from the society's mainstream, into the Christian community

C) Become more open and obvious in christian practice

D Attempt to remove the offending parties or even the government

10. What should we think about the Samaritans?

A) Who?

B) Will the fight on our side?

C) Their beliefs are wrong, have nothing to do with them

D) They get some things right, but it doesn't matter, they're trash

11. After we die

A) We are eternally resurrected

B) Righteous people disagree on this matter

C) Our people live on

D) We go into the ground, or at most some shadow world

12. One's personal practice of worship, prayer, charity, and fasting

A) Should be visible, a good example to weaker brethren and outsiders

B) Should be communal and intense, our souls and the world hang in the balance

C) Should stick it in the eye of the seculat authorities

D) Above all, should first adher to the traditional fundamentals

13. The most desirable end for a Christian in this world is to

A) Live in a nation that honors God

B) have proper worship

C) live in a believing community devoted to prayer and study

D) live a life of purity

14. When the nation (or church) as a whole is suffering, it is most likely the result of

A) Inadequate prayer and devotion

B) One or a few major transgressions by the leaders or the people as a whole

C) Lack of essential piety by the leaders and authorities

D) General lack of adherence to formal practice by the people

15. A fellow believer in name who keeps up the observable practice of the community (worship, prayer, fasting, tithing) but teaches non-orthodox beliefs should be

A) Hailed as a brother. There aren't enough of us to be picky

B) Avoided

C) Encouraged to go on retreats or enroll in intense programs and studies

D) Tolerated but not encouraged to speak

16. When the practice of Christianity requires daily conflict with secular authorities, the believer should

A) Side with a political faction which will tolerate our practices

B) Leave the country

C) Continue as before, disregarding consequences

D) Embrace the opportunity to display faith

17. When members of another Christian group have influence with secular authorities, it is best to

A) Support their secular power, but attempt to change them from within

B) Challenge them openly on disputed points

C) Continue discussion with that group, seeking neither to aid nor to thwart them

D) Defer to their wishes and strategies, hoping to work on two fronts with the secular powers

18. Tithing is important because

A) The work of God needs the money

B) It is commanded

C) It encourages the development of character

D) It ties you to the community

19. When one's spiritual life is deteriorating, it is best to

A) Change the cultural environemtn to remove obstacles for believers

B) Focus on the central doctrinal issues

C) Focus on the aspects of the faith that seem small to others but are crucial

D) Abstain from worldly pleasure and devote oneself to prayer, fasting, and community

20. Admission to the Christian community should

A) Be automatic to anyone who names the name of Christ

B) Not be hasty, to encourage seriousness and commitment

C) be contingent on obvious belief and practice

D) be contingent on doctrinal agreement

I don't have a scoring sheet I can find, but think that most of it can be figured back from the introduction. The scores don't much matter anyway.

I am noticing that mental health funding is not prominent here, despite the huge number of disability years and hospital bed-days.

It's the doubling down that did it. The British complain a lot but have historically put up with a great deal. Having been thrown a cookie would have been enough for many. But virtue signalling being what it is, the Remainers couldn't bear to throw a cookie.